From: "Timothy C. May" <tcmay@got.net>
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 21:05:18 -0800 (PST)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: My messages not appearing on either of the lists?
Message-ID: <v03007801af20611fe990@[207.167.93.63]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Cypherpunks,

My posting seem to be going into Limbo, being sent neither to the
Cypherpunks Heaven Sandy administers nor to the flames of the Cypherpunks
Hell. At least this is how things now appear.

I sent the message below to the list this morning (Thursday) at 8:43 a.m.
PST. As of tonight, 12 hours later, I haven't seen it on either the
Singapore Web site--last archived 30 minutes ago--or on the "Flames" list
to which I have temporarily subscribed (to see what Sandy counts as a
"flame").

Has anyone else seen it? I've looked, but there's always a chance I somehow
spaced out and missed it. (I doubt it though.) If I have missed it, despite
carefully scanning for it for the past 8-12 hours, my apologies. If it has
not appeared on either the Censored list or the Flames list, then something
is rotten in the state of Denmark.

By the way, I noted that many of the messages which appeared at the
Singapore Web archive site have dates much later than mine, including
several dated at least 8-10 hours after my message. Likewise, some of the
Flames messages are dated much later than my message.

(Bill Stewart got a message through dated Thu, 06 Feb 1997 16:06:06 -0800,
Mark Henderson got one through at Thu, 6 Feb 1997 15:56:19 PST, and so on.
One would thus have thought that my message, dated Thu, 6 Feb 1997 08:43:35
-0800, would by now either have been approved and hence on the Censored
list, or rejected as unfit for Cypherpunks to sully their neurons with, and
hence passed on to the Flames list. By the way, some of the "Flames"
messages are also dated late afternoon or evening.)

So, is my message just sitting around someplace, awaiting some final
decision? What's the basis of this decision? (Perhaps Sandy has "kicked it
upstairs" to John for him to decide on? Just a hypothesis....)

I will repeat my message below. As you will be able to see, my message
contains no "flames" of its own, and the messages it quotes do not seem
flamish to me, either.

(It is true that Vulis uses the phrase "Limey faggots," in reference to
beer-serving habits, but he does not directly insult any list members with
this phrase. If Sandy is calling this phrase a flame, then Cypherpunks will
be blocked from their usual characterizations of Congresscritters and NSA
stooges.)


I think a delay of greater than 11 hours in being distributed on one of the
two lists (even if my message is sent out in the next hour or so) is
unacceptable. If a moderator cannot get to traffic in the order in which it
was received and disposition it promptly, he or she has no business being a
moderator of a high-volume list. (Eric Blossom's and Ray Arachelian's "best
of" compilations are a different matter, for reasons discussed many times
here.)

So, why hasn't this message appeared on one of the two lists?

--Tim May



>Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 08:43:35 -0800
>To: cypherpunks@toad.com
>From: "Timothy C. May" <tcmay@got.net>
>Subject: Re: Moderation [Tim,Sandy]
>Cc:
>Bcc:
>X-Attachments:
>
>
>I decided to subscribe only to the "cypherpunks flames" list, just to see
>what was being filtered into it.
>
>The message below is one example of what is going there. I received it,
>and the header includes the line: "Sender:
>owner-cypherpunks-unedited@toad.com", so I am surmising that it was indeed
>filtered into the flames list.
>
>Now, admittedly, the _content_ of this kind of post is "off-topic," but I
>sure don't see any evidence of _flames_.
>
>Is Sandy now filtering based on his notions of list relevance, and not
>just on the basis of insults, jabs, flames, and "lack of comity"? While
>lack of relevance may be a criterion for someone to filter by, it doesn't
>square with anything I recall Sandy citing, and it introduces a new and
>dimension to the debate.
>
>--Tim May
>
>(The entire post is included, to ensure that no one claims I am editing
>out any flames, insults, etc.)
>
>
>At 11:06 PM -0800 2/5/97, Dale Thorn wrote:
>>Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
>>> Dale Thorn <dthorn@gte.net> writes:
>>
>>> > > > The drunk can be excluded, but when someone wants to use the drunk as
>>> > > > an example to escalate the exclusion to other persons who are not in
>>> > > > fact drunk, watch out!
>>
>>> > > If I get really really drunk, which happens very seldom, then I'm
>>> > > too drunk to post. I don't mind an occasional beer, though.
>>
>>> > > Oksas, have you ever tried beer? :-)
>>
>>> > I had my first beer(s) in three years at one of those industrial
>>> > parties last night.  It made the craps table action seem a bit
>>> > merrier, and the girls were friendlier too.
>>
>>> I like an occasional Coors Lite.  BTW I think Limey Faggots are right about
>>> one think: I like room-temperature beer better than cold beer. YMMV.
>>
>>Interesting coincidence for people on opposite coasts - the bar at
>>the hotel had two choices:  Bud regular and Coors light.  I took the
>>Coors.
>
>
>
>
>

Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside"
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."